Can the Deep State really be diminished or defeated?

I agree that our administrative state has grown so powerful that it will be nearly impossible to control it, much less cut it down to a manageable size.

Nearly impossible. Maybe not quite completely impossible.

I truly believe that Trump is the only person on the planet capable of challenging the administrative state head on. He understands what he's up against, and they nearly destroyed him, so he's pissed. Mix in his naturally combative nature and seemingly fearless approach to conflict, and maybe he has a chance.

If he fails, which he likely will, I think that our last real chance will have passed.

But heck, you never know. I've given up betting against Trump...

Tim the Enchanter (View Post):

While Trump may be able to change the person at the top of the pyramid of various agencies, can a new person really change the culture and priorities of a group of lifetime civil servants who know where the bodies are buried and, in regard to the security agencies, possess budgets and data that are shielded from the executive, legislative and judicial branches?

Yes, but it requires will. Also, appointments typically go a few layers deep, but cabinet secretaries and directors often choose those appointments with approval. Say Richard Grenell is SecState, he's going to break some things and appoint people who help him break things, and identify new things that need breaking. Personally, I'd like to see him at CIA.

They have weaknesses we don't usually consider. They can be made to self deport, maybe.

The society has been lying about a great many things. Assuming someone is thinking about redirecting our trajectory from a position of transitory power, their problem is to select which pebble to move, to start a preference cascade.

There’s an opportunity for three consecutive terms of a Republican presidency.
‘It can be done with smart and timely appointments of capable people who understand the bureaucracy. Congress will also have the chance to use the appropriations process to starve the beast where necessary.

One of the truths I discovered is that if you want something to happen, you need to have a *mechanism* that corrects for any issues of drift, misdirection, infiltration, graft, corruption, mismanagement, extortion,... whatever.

As a metaphor, consider driving your car to a local place that you frequent. You know the route really, really well. Now imagine doing it blindfolded... you probably wouldn't make it down the block without a terrible accident. Without a mechanism of continuously sensing the situation and taking corrective action driving goes from reliable transportation to dangerous as hell.

(Maybe not the best metaphor; I'm open to suggestions.)

I've mentioned before how Indian economist Amartya Sen talks about a "Functional Democracy", a condition where the leaders can be removed if they don't do a good job. It provides an incentive for leaders to do a good job, and offers an incentive for others who can do a better job. A Functional Democracy doesn't have to be a Democracy at all, it could technically be a dictator with a gun to his head.

Anyway, without a corrective mechanism in place, OF COURSE a government agency will turn into the deep state. You shouldn't expect otherwise.

A sooper-simple solution to keep government agencies from being hijacked into political weapons is to require that each government agency have an equal number of employees from each of the major political parties. 'Sort of a DEI back-atcha.

You can look up the actual numbers somewhere, but right now most government agency employees are like 85% or more Democrats.